While Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey have taken pains to define “civil society” and its implications for society (Neti, Neti), does that matter to the common man of India in any way? Have they tried to address why the government is playing deaf to the legitimate demands put forth by a group of people who many consider to be the voice of the people. What exactly is this National Advisory Council and who has constituted it? Is it a democratically elected body? Is it not remote-controlling the PM?
Anand Ravindran, Dubai
Civil society is a nebulous entity that we’ve been hearing about for the past year. In Calcutta, beautiful women throw themselves before TV cameras to be flashed as part of civil society. In Delhi, too. If TV wasn’t around to cover them, civil society would have flopped. The very intention of civil society is suspect. The promoters thereof are self-seekers.
Sanket Biswas, Calcutta
This essay is like a filibuster - an American senate procedure to delay, divert, subvert and deflate a perceived target.
Some examples.
1) Humpty Dumpty VS. Alice
“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ” “But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected. “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master that’s all.” Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. “They’ve a temper, some of them—particularly verbs, they’re the proudest—adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs—however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”
2) Walrus VS. carpenter
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things: Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax-- Of cabbages--and kings-- And why the sea is boiling hot-- And whether pigs have wings." "But wait a bit," the Oysters cried, "Before we have our chat; For some of us are out of breath, And all of us are fat!" "No hurry!" said the Carpenter. They thanked him much for that.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things: Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax-- Of cabbages--and kings-- And why the sea is boiling hot-- And whether pigs have wings."
"But wait a bit," the Oysters cried, "Before we have our chat; For some of us are out of breath, And all of us are fat!" "No hurry!" said the Carpenter. They thanked him much for that.
3) Sir Humphrey, the civil servant
'Oh yes, Prime Minister.' By yes he meant no. 'Indeed it is, beyond question, at the appropriate juncture, in due course, in the fullness of time.'
4) How many angels could dance on the head of a pin ?
Dear Aruna roy,you have taken lot of pains in defining "civil society" and its implications on society,does that matter to the common man of India in any way? Have you tried to address why the Govt of India is playing deaf ears to the legitimate demands of the common man put forward by a group of people,whom many consider to be the voice of the people. What exactly is this National advisory council , and the author is belived to be a member, who has constituted this council ? is it a democratically elected body?is not this body who is supossedly remote controlling the policies of the Govt and remote controlling the PM?
How did they treat the Left parties for being on the same boat as the BJP on the Indo-US nucle--"
People showed both the door in 2009 .What more you want ?
A question to Outlook veterans here,
How did they treat the Left parties for being on the same boat as the BJP on the Indo-US nuclear deal?
Pulling in too many arguments and trying to define a civil-society as unadulterated as possible, this article seems to be an arduous and sincere effort at confusing themselves
##In another context, the questions put to the National Advisory Council (NAC) and the Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) regarding legitimacy and capacity to draft policy and laws (regardless of membership) need answers##
Till then can the NAC restrain itself from drafting 1 curry banquets, single yarn apparel etc??
When a democracy degenerates into a kleptocracy, when the elected representatives turn a deaf ear to vox populi, that is when a group of concerned citizens, who articulate the need for reform, gain prominence and massive public support.
What gives them legitimacy is the support they receive from the people, their own unimpeachable integrity and the cause they are fighting for. Call them vigilantes, call them civil society, call them the A-team, how does it matter? What's in a name?
Let us not debate about labels. For God's sake, do not digress from the main topic, which is about the provisions of the proposed Lok Pal bill, which has been kept in a limbo for many decades.
R V SUBRAMANIAN ///Than you! For the honour!///
You are most welcome.
RV subramanian,
Congress encourages conversion to christianity because all the converts are loyal voters and supporters of congress. You are part of same phenomenon. People like you or anwaar have long surrendered your powers to think independently. Thats why you are consistently supporting the criminals in government. Not all muslims or all christians think like you which is evident from the forum but you and anwar or kel shorey have committment to congress and not committment to country and you oppose any think touched by saffron. be it sohrabuddin, ishrat jahan, kashmir, orissa. all your views are counter to majority of Indians.
Dinesh >> Depends on what kind of civil society you belong to. When it comes to civil society you want they should have100% support. That can never happen. Does any ruling party have/had cent per cent support of people?
You have raised a very pertinent point here. Let me reiterate again something all objective citizens would agree - All Laws that have direct impact on our citizens should be drafted and approved by a collective of educated, and objective lawmakers belonging to all recognized political parties across the ideological and social spectrum.Has it ever happened?
Just to remind some folks, most of India's laws after the first general elections were pushed by one political party that has been controlled mostly by a single family. And this political party, (which has ruled for 56 out of 64 years of Independence) has never got more than 50% of popular votes (the best they got was 48% in 1984 polls and that was amidst the backdrop of the assasination of its principal leader).
Narendra >> Guys, remember how they were defending the gun toting Maoists not too long ago?
Nothing to laugh here. The India's Leftist Intellectuals are always consistent in saying that "Heads I win, Tails you lose". One must admire their consistency.
Sanket Biswas >> The Civil Society does not look at poor, god forshaken and illiterate or ugly looking men or women people who do not speak or understand English language which is the medium of communication.
The above sentences definitely apply to the NAC which is the super government imposed by the India's ruling dynasty since 2004.
As I stated earlier, only a collective of well educated , objective and civil politicians from all political parties across spectrum (all parties, right, left, religious, casteist etc) should be empowered and authorised to make major laws. But that is never the case. In India, lawmaking is mostly driven by a particular political party which is driven by a political dynasty. Only thing is this dynasty has since 2004 outsourced this task to a body that calls itself as NAC
Bharat >> The NAC with a super PM and a super sized-budget greater than the PMO has Sonia and her cronies (friendly NGO activists) enacting policies with no acocuntability and the actual Ministers knowtowing to these people
Precisely. Who is this NAC? Have they been elected by the people of India? Have they stood in any elections, atleast in municipality ward elections? Is NAC a constitutionally mandated body?
Indian constitution has given powers to enact laws, only to the elected legislative bodies (state assemblies, LokSabha/Rajya sabha). So why is this that this NAC is drafting laws that impact the whole nation?
And before the usual Left Liberal defence comes out along expected lines - Congress Chairperson nominated NAC, Congress is the ruling party bla bla, let us remind ourself that Congress in itself does not have a majority in Lok sabha, and it is in a hopeless minority in rajya sabha and majority of Indian states are ruled by parties or coalitions that are against the Congress party. And Congress party got 28% of popular votes in what was its best election performance in last 2 decades (i.e in 2009 polls)
Given this, it is not NAC that should draft laws, it should rather be a collective of educated and objective lawmakers of various parties represented in our legislatures which should draft laws.
dinesh chauksey
Than you! For the honour!
R V SUBRAMANIAn ///I hope my disagreement with your views do not disentitle me of this honour!///
Of course not. Unity in diversity is our main strength.
dinesh chauksey:
If you are not linked with any even then you can feel proud for being a citizen of this great nation.
Yes, i am a proud citizen of this great nation. I hope my disagreement with your views do not disentitle me of this honour!
R V SUBRAMANIAM /// i am neither linked to any political party nor Govt.. i should, therefore, label myself as belonging to an "uncivil society" or I am anti "civil society"///
Depends on what kind of civil society you belong to. When it comes to civil society you want they should have100% support. That can never happen. Does any ruling party have/had cent per cent support of people? Still they govern on the basis of majority. Civil society is a group of people who want to undertake some cause for the benefit of general public. If people find the group credible and the cause as their own they join them. If you have some zeal, courage and intention please form a civil society. If your credibility and cause attracts people they will join your group. Here cause and credibility of the group is more important that mobilize people to join them. No Govt. has ever supported a civil society who want to cleanse some evil which govt does not intend to do. Here comes 'Indian edition of Goebles' who will propagate to defame such group by labeling them communal or by personal assault and so on. And you know they have a very fertile mind and invent many ways for subversion of such group. If you are not linked with any even then you can feel proud for being a citizen of this great nation.
REF 10: Mr Ramakrishnan
We all tend to live in the comfort and security of a cubbyhole culture, wherever we are, whether we migrate from Trichy to Delhi or migrate to other parts of the world. This cubbyhole culture severely restricts our horizon to think beyond our narrow interests. There is nothing wrong in holding a particular viewpoint but to reject an Indian as unIndian,because the person is holding a different viewpoint, tantamounts to intolerance bordering on Bigotry.
Does the label or definition of it matter? We have corrupt governments regardless of the party in power. Highfaluting arguments about democracy and parliaments are meaningless. If it takes fast unto death to change this corrupt system, so be it. I salute the Hazares, Bhushans, Ramdevs, et al.
Ref Post 1:
Thanx Bharat: That was a very good article by Dorab. Agree that an NGO like NAC oversees drafting of important laws. But it is the Parliament which ultimately debates the issue before its final enactment. The following conclusive points from Dorab, in ths article, are interesting.
"Protest fasts are fine but fasts unto death have no place in a democracy. Invoking Gandhi and going on fasts unto death and blackmailing the government for personal agendas is shaming the Mahatma. His fasts were primarily against alien rule and not against an elected government. The words of Stanley Baldwin, a British prime minister, correctly describe the NAC, Anna, Baba and others of their ilk: “Power without responsibility, the prerogative of the harlot through the ages.”
Instead of debating this meaningless issues, let these people who cannot do anything for the cause, shut up and wait for something to happen?
I have many points to debate. What is autocracy? What is government?
What is democracy?
Buying the voting power of the poor people by corrupt politicians? Politicized and corrupt police force favouring the rich and corrupt and not upholding the rule of the law? Directionless state with no clear implementable future plan? Clueless state whose growth is propelled by the private sector inspite of several hurdles? Watching with belief during every election display of muscle power? Watching with disbelief that tainted candidates have an upper hand in the election? Seeing India grow as a software power for the outside world but having no plan to tap the same for the benefit of the state? Creating an unparalleled black economy rivalling the white one? Inable State to provide quality health, education and infrastructure spend but having superpower ambitions? Having only choices to elect corrupt incumbent vs corrupt during last rule? Silently seeing every independent institutions which are supposed to be pillars of democracy slowing getting politicised and eroded (like Presidency, CVC, Media)? Jusifying coalition politics as an excuse by the highest political office? Creating unequal growth where rich grow richer and poor growing poor? Providing Middlemen to corner a big share of state spend? A state where the courts are not given adequate funding (in other words,delaying justice thereby creating orderliness in the society)? Ministers having no time to govern and only concentrate on politics? Seeing uneducated Ministers governing(? if at all) so called Modern India!?
So What type of Democracy are we???????
RV subramnian, gurgaon, Agent of anti indian missionaries. Ignored.
What else one can expect from a NAC member who has not been elected by people but is enjoying benefits of a minister. If they have some moral left in them they should fight election and make law legally. They are not beaurocrats or politician or 'civil society then what the hell they are, boot lickers of an Italy born, ex barmaid, currently the President of Congress, SONIA.
So now it's Congress, the elected party?
LOLOLOLOL,
Guys, remember how they were defending the gun toting Maoists not too long ago?
What sort of crap is this? What were the authors trying to say in this 'utter waste of time' article?
Civil Society is a nebulous entity we have been hearing of since a year or so. In Calcutta beautiful women throw themselves before the TV camera to be flashed as part of the Civil Society. In Delhi too we see similar scenario. I guess, if TV were not there to cover them in prime time shows, Civil Society would have flopped. Some promoters can arrange a Civil Society like political rallies and attain status of leadership which will open avenues for his further rise in social, political and financial scales. Damn god business. Anna Hazare might have fallen prey to it, thanks to some crooks flunking him in public platform. Ramdev is much crafty with his own hidden agenda.
The Civil Society does not look at poor, god forshaken and illiterate or ugly looking men or women people who do not speak or understand English language which is the medium of communication. The very intention of the Civil Society is suspect. The promoters thereof are self seekers.
One useful attribute of " civil society ", broadly defined as any group which speaks up for the common good, should be a measure of tentativeness, humility for sure. When even the power of the government is not absolute, moderated as it is by institutional checks and balances and periodic accountability to the electorate, the last thing civil society should presume to is Napoleonic infallibility and moral dogma. That is the point at which the empire strikes back.
“What I could understand from the debate between Anna & Party and the Government that one makes ‘Civil Society’ and the other ‘Uncivil(ized) Society’.”
The term "civil society", to me, in the current context, connotes a group of citizens agitating against corruption. i, as a private citizen, do not agree with the creation of a Superman Lokpal. i am neither linked to any political party nor Govt.. i should, therefore, label myself as belonging to an "uncivil society" or I am anti "civil society" .
Both Baba Ramdev and “Team Anna” may be barking from different corners., but they are part of the same formation, as they seem to be complementing each other with a common goal, whatever it might turn out to be ultimately.
1. Nikhil dey and Aruna Roy though pretend to be leftist are too closely aligned with Congress. 2. The movements have sole objective of removing corruption and any one who question the locus standii, legality, or democracy is not honest. He must first answer his question about his views on need for anti corruption laws and action against black money then only he should move ahead for questioning the organisation. 3. What ever number of journalists sympathetic to ruling party write or make noise they do not transfer a single vote. Digvijay singh has this experience. just one beore the election he was getting all positive reviews from media and people were afraid of congressis that they didnt reveal their mind to any one. But come election the voting was so heavily anti congress all his management of marginal seats blew away in wind.
The NAC with a super PM and a super sized-budget greater than the PMO has Sonia and her cronies (friendly NGO activists) enacting policies with no acocuntability and the actual Ministers knowtowing to these people.
This is not Parliamentary democracy.
As has been lucidly explained by Dorab R Sopariwala, let Sonia become a Minister of some department and make laws and be held accountable for them:
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/dorab-r-sopariwala-nac-=-anna-=-baba/438649/ - NAC = Anna = Baba? by Dorab R Sopariwala
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
But:
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy: http://blog.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&pid=1669&eid=5
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT